dr.ralph

Should I sell my 4 15K.3 and buy 4 WDRaptor 74GB ?

Recommended Posts

On the top of this page under "performance database" ;)

But we need further benchmarks from the Raptor 74GB, and we need them fast B)

Which other benches do you need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would keep the SCSI drives. Here are my reasons:

1) It's a hassle to switch. You've got to pay for the SATA drives, install them, move all your data over, then find a buyer for the SCSI stuff to recoup your investment.

2) Even if you recoup your investment, you still lose the time it takes to order, install, migrate, and sell. My time is precious to me, so that's a big disadvantage right there.

3) Benefits are marginal. I have a personal rule to never upgrade a component or subsystem unless it will double the performance* of that subsystem. With how quickly speed improves, anything less is a waste of time and money, IMO. (* or double capacity if I need the additional capacity).

4) SCSI stuff is *extremely* well tested. The Raptors may have 5 year warranties, but have they been proven to be solid drives? What about the SATA controllers? I still trust SCSI drives and controllers far more than SATA.

5) SCSI drivers are mature. On Windows, you may find decent SATA drivers, but if you ever stray from Windows, you'll be glad to have the SCSI stuff which everyone supports.

6) I may be wrong on this, but I think SCSI holds its value better. How much can you sell a used 1 year old SATA drive for? Compare the price decline to that of SCSI.

7) Adding additional devices is not a problem for you since you already have a controller that will handle 30 devices. If you wanted to add more SATA drives, you'd need to get an additional controller.

8) Noise. I've got two 15K.3 drives in my system (18GB & 73GB). Another system has a single 36GB first generation Raptor. The first gen Raptor is noticably louder than the 15K.3 drives. Perhaps the new Raptors are less noisy, but I would be careful about trading a known quantity for an unknown quantity (noise level of 4 15K.3's is known to you, but noise level of 4 Raptors is not).

9) You'll drive yourself crazy if you always try to stay on the bleeding edge of performance. What will you do when the 15K.4's arrive and they beat the new Raptors in all tests? What about if a 20K drive is introduced? At some point, you just have to be content with what you have and know that even if your stuff is no longer the fastest available, it will be after your next upgrade cycle.

10) Here's something to ask yourself... Why is speed so important to you? Is it because your time is really, really valuable? If so, then why spend the time to upgrade a system that will have marginal speed benefits? The time you (may) save in having a faster disk subsystem will be less than the time you'll spend on the upgrade. From a strictly time point of view, it's a negative return on investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff has a pretty good summary I'd say, so I can't add much more to that. Point #9 is especially true. :) I've been doing upgrades when a drive is 2X faster, and 3X on the processor.

You'd probably be better off by buying more RAM, unless you are at 1GB already. Then you can disable your swap file. My computer has been running fine like this now for the last few weeks.

If you run out of harddrive space and need a cheaper alternative to a large capacity 10K RPM SCSI drive soon, then the new raptors might make more sense.

Randy

(With two 15K.3's and a 250GB ATA.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would keep the SCSI drives.  Here are my reasons:

1) It's a hassle to switch.  You've got to pay for the SATA drives, install them, move all your data over, then find a buyer for the SCSI stuff to recoup your investment.

2) Even if you recoup your investment, you still lose the time it takes to order, install, migrate, and sell.  My time is precious to me, so that's a big disadvantage right there.

3) Benefits are marginal.  I have a personal rule to never upgrade a component or subsystem unless it will double the performance* of that subsystem.  With how quickly speed improves, anything less is a waste of time and money, IMO. (* or double capacity if I need the additional capacity).

4) SCSI stuff is *extremely* well tested.  The Raptors may have 5 year warranties, but have they been proven to be solid drives?  What about the SATA controllers?  I still trust SCSI drives and controllers far more than SATA.

5) SCSI drivers are mature.  On Windows, you may find decent SATA drivers, but if you ever stray from Windows, you'll be glad to have the SCSI stuff which everyone supports.

6) I may be wrong on this, but I think SCSI holds its value better.  How much can you sell a used 1 year old SATA drive for?  Compare the price decline to that of SCSI.

7) Adding additional devices is not a problem for you since you already have a controller that will handle 30 devices.  If you wanted to add more SATA drives, you'd need to get an additional controller.

8) Noise.  I've got two 15K.3 drives in my system (18GB & 73GB).  Another system has a single 36GB first generation Raptor.  The first gen Raptor is noticably louder than the 15K.3 drives.  Perhaps the new Raptors are less noisy, but I would be careful about trading a known quantity for an unknown quantity (noise level of 4 15K.3's is known to you, but noise level of 4 Raptors is not).

9) You'll drive yourself crazy if you always try to stay on the bleeding edge of performance.  What will you do when the 15K.4's arrive and they beat the new Raptors in all tests?  What about if a 20K drive is introduced?  At some point, you just have to be content with what you have and know that even if your stuff is no longer the fastest available, it will be after your next upgrade cycle.

10) Here's something to ask yourself... Why is speed so important to you?  Is it because your time is really, really valuable?  If so, then why spend the time to upgrade a system that will have marginal speed benefits?  The time you (may) save in having a faster disk subsystem will be less than the time you'll spend on the upgrade.  From a strictly time point of view, it's a negative return on investment.

I really must thank you for you in-depth answer to me !

You simply summed it all up and gave me a very well thought-through conclusion.

Especially the points about always wanting the fastest thing out there - it can drive you crazy to upgrade constantly, whenever something new is announced, that is faster than what you already got.

I'll stick to SCSI - and will await the new Seagate scsi line of harddrives (perhaps 15K.4 or 20K.1)

But thank you again for your comment :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeff has a pretty good summary I'd say, so I can't add much more to that.  Point #9 is especially true.  :)  I've been doing upgrades when a drive is 2X faster, and 3X on the processor.

You'd probably be better off by buying more RAM, unless you are at 1GB already.  Then you can disable your swap file.  My computer has been running fine like this now for the last few weeks.

If you run out of harddrive space and need a cheaper alternative to a large capacity 10K RPM SCSI drive soon, then the new raptors might make more sense.

Randy

(With two 15K.3's and a 250GB ATA.)

Yes, you are so right.

I already got 4 sticks of 512MB PC3500 DDR Kingston HyperX ram in my system (summing up to 2 GB of RAM) - so swapfile/scratch disk/pagefile is not something I frequently use in my system.

I don't think I'll run out of harddrive space for now - I run with 2 X 250GB Maxtor Maxline II+ SATA drives in raid 1 (back up of my raid 0 drives and Mp3 & pics) and my 4 36GB 15K.3 SCSI drives running in raid 0 (2 X 2 raid 0 each on separate scsi channel)

I will be loking forward to the next Seagate generation of 15K SCSI drives (probably called the 15K.4) and also the first generation 20.000 rpm scsi drives (maybe called 20K.1)

I think Seagate is working hard on realeasing those two new drives right now - my guees is that we will see them in stores primo spring 2004.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I already got 4 sticks of 512MB PC3500 DDR Kingston HyperX ram in my system (summing up to 2 GB of RAM) - so swapfile/scratch disk/pagefile is not something I frequently use in my system.

:o , that's a mistake, having more than two sticks of memory modules decrease the overall speed by 20% or more, Better get two 1GB Modules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's so funny to me is that, in 4 years the 36/74GB Raptor will pretty much be crap compared to the 15.3k if you still use them, because the programs will be so intence in I/O and the Cheetah just makes circles around those drives for that.

Sorry, consider me ignorant.....what? Why? How? Do you forsee Raptors slowing down in the future? :rolleyes:

oh you know what I'm talking about ;) , let's use 4/5 year old PATA hard drives to do my daily work and hear the music coming off the drive's non-stop seeking at all times :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I already got 4 sticks of 512MB PC3500 DDR Kingston HyperX ram in my system (summing up to 2 GB of RAM) - so swapfile/scratch disk/pagefile is not something I frequently use in my system.

:o , that's a mistake, having more than two sticks of memory modules decrease the overall speed by 20% or more, Better get two 1GB Modules.

Are you saying that my system would be faster with 2X512 MB than with my current 4X512 MB ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, get a Memory Bechmarking program and Benchmark your system, then take two sticks of Memory Modules and BenchMark your system again. Someone made a Review about it, i'll try to find it again and post it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you saying that my system would be faster with 2X512 MB than with my current 4X512 MB ?

Surely not! :blink:

Actually, according to Anandtech's latest research, it depends on what chipset you've got, what speed memory you're running, and whether it's all single sided sticks, all double sided, or a mix. In some cases, 4 sticks were faster than 2 sticks.

I don't recall them getting 20% difference between best and worst, however. I'd have thought the benefit of twice as much memory would outweigh the inefficiencies of addressing four sticks of RAM.

I await further enlightenment!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you please help me with some serious fast information about this matter very QUICKLY :o

I've just bought 4 sticks of 512MB Kingston Hyperx PC3500 ram - and they are still in their original sealed packing.

If in fact it's true that 2 sticks of 512 MB ram is faster than 4 sticks of 512 MB - i've been offered a full refund by the computer store where I bought the ram.

In the meantime I've sold my old 4 sticks of 512 MB PC 2100 ram - so I can't make the comparisom between two and four stick of the same ram in my system.

I dont' want to brake the seal on my new ram, if I can return the two of them for a full refund.

I've got untill wednesday to make up my mind whether I want to keep all four sticks if ram or return the two sticks and keep the other two.

My system is:

Intel P4 3 Ghz 800Mhz FSB

Asus P4C800-E De Luxe motherboard

Will this system be able to benifit from 4 sticks of ram - or would it be faster with only two sticks ?

I've checked the price of 1 GB HyperX ram - and the price in Denmark where I come from is grotesque high compared to the price of 512 MB ram - we're talking 5-6 times higher price of 1 GB compared to 512 MB ram - so 1 GB blocks of ram is totally out of the question for me.

The price for 512 MB Kingston HyperX PC3500 ram is approx. 150$, the price for a 1GB stick of the same ram would be around 500$ :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could you please help me with some serious fast information about this matter very QUICKLY  :o

I've just bought 4 sticks of 512MB Kingston Hyperx PC3500 ram - and they are still in their original sealed packing.

If in fact it's true that 2 sticks of 512 MB ram is faster than 4 sticks of 512 MB - i've been offered a full refund by the computer store where I bought the ram.

In the meantime I've sold my old 4 sticks of 512 MB PC 2100 ram - so I can't make the comparisom between two and four stick of the same ram in my system.

I dont' want to brake the seal on my new ram, if I can return the two of them for a full refund.

I've got untill wednesday to make up my mind whether I want to keep all four sticks if ram or return the two sticks and keep the other two.

My system is:

Intel P4 3 Ghz 800Mhz FSB

Asus P4C800-E De Luxe motherboard

Will this system be able to benifit from 4 sticks of ram - or would it be faster with only two sticks ?

I've checked the price of 1 GB HyperX ram - and the price in Denmark where I come from is grotesque high compared to the price of 512 MB ram - we're talking 5-6 times higher price of 1 GB compared to 512 MB ram - so 1 GB blocks of ram is totally out of the question for me.

The price for 512 MB Kingston HyperX PC3500 ram is approx. 150$, the price for a 1GB stick of the same ram would be around 500$  :huh:

At best, It's a matter of application.

IF the stars are aligned just right, the first 1GB of RAM will be a little faster if you only have 1GB of RAM (2 sticks)...but that second GB of RAM will be a whole lot slower...BECAUSE IT ISN'T THERE!

If you plan on using more than 1GB of memory, don't even think of downgrading to 1GB. If you only plan on using 1GB of RAM, what are you doing with the second gig anyway?

If you aren't sure, keep the RAM. This is a non-issue IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If in fact it's true that 2 sticks of 512 MB ram is faster than 4 sticks of 512 MB

I seriously doubt a system with 1 GB RAM will be faster than one with 2 GB. Perhaps it would be faster using 2 1 GB sticks instead of 4 512 MB sticks but I doubt you'll ever notice the difference except perhaps in certain apps and *gasp* benchmarks. But as you stated the 1 GB DIMMs are outrageously priced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything I have seen, 4 sticks tend to be slightly slower than 2 with the same memory quantity. Aparently it has somethig to do with additional overhead when working with 4 sticks. Is it worth buying 1GB sticks? Probably not. Every test I have seen has a minor hit in performance. However, just make sure you need more than 1GB. If you dont, your spending money you dont have to and your getting a performance hit you dont need to incur.

On another note. I am in the same boat. I own two 15k drives at about 18GB a piece. Spent a bunch on them. But now I am eyeing the new raptors. I would probably end up raiding a pair of them. I am totally tapped on HD space and I am debating my next course of action. Do I replace the older of the two 15k drives with a new higer capacity one, do I just add a higher capacity drive to the two? Or do I throw the whole thing out and get some Raptors. I must say, Im not that I/O intensive, unless looking at internet porn in intensive...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've decided to keep BOTH my 4 15K.3's SCSI drives and my 4 HyperX 512MB ram modules.

The review and conclusion at firingsquad of 4 blocks of ram VS 2 blocks has been up to debate in many forums around the world.

Some say the review is correct in the assumption that 2 sticks are faster than 4 sticks, others say that the conclusion in the review is frivolous.

Anandtech comes to the exact opposite conclusion is his review...so nothing is for sure in this world......... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've decided to keep BOTH my 4 15K.3's SCSI drives and my 4 HyperX 512MB ram modules.

Smart choice. Those SCSI drives are excellent and you can't go wrong with more RAM (Seriously, it's counterintuitive to me how cutting your RAM in half could increase performance, since any modern O/S will make efficient use of ALL RAM. Even slow RAM is much faster than hard drive random I/O, which is what you get when you run out. I'd take more RAM anyday, it's a no-brainer.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've decided to keep BOTH my 4 15K.3's SCSI drives and my 4 HyperX 512MB ram modules.

Smart choice. Those SCSI drives are excellent and you can't go wrong with more RAM (Seriously, it's counterintuitive to me how cutting your RAM in half could increase performance, since any modern O/S will make efficient use of ALL RAM. Even slow RAM is much faster than hard drive random I/O, which is what you get when you run out. I'd take more RAM anyday, it's a no-brainer.)

I will however be looking for possible upgrade to the next generation of Cheetah's the 15K.4. My guess is that Seagate is very close to launching this 15K.4 SCSI drive.

I relly do hope that Seagate has managed to make this cheetah drive even more silent than the 15K.3 - hopefully close to a noiselevel around 40 db (like the Raptor 74GB).

For now I must say that I'm a Seagte man when it comes to SCSI drives - I know the Fujitsu and Maxtor 15K is faster - but also a lot louder and hotter. I've high hopes for this 15K.4 drive.

In fact I also consider dumping my Hitachi 4.200 rpm 40Gb drive in my notebook and purchase the new Seagate momemtum 8mb cache 2,5' 40GB 5.400 rpm harddrive. This or the new Hitachi 5K80 5.400 rpm 8 mb cache 2,5' drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just save your money for the 2001FP, I'm sure the price for your country will be extortionate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just save your money for the 2001FP, I'm sure the price for your country will be extortionate.

The etsimated price for the Dell 2001Fp in my country will be 1500$

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For now I must say that I'm a Seagte man when it comes to SCSI drives - I know the Fujitsu and Maxtor 15K is faster - but also a lot louder and hotter. I've high hopes for this 15K.4 drive.

In fact I also consider dumping my Hitachi 4.200 rpm 40Gb drive in my notebook and purchase the new Seagate momemtum 8mb cache 2,5' 40GB 5.400 rpm harddrive. This or the new Hitachi 5K80 5.400 rpm 8 mb cache 2,5' drive.

The 2.5" Seagates don't really seem to be available with 8 megs of cache, and their dimensions are somewhat unusual in some respects (so they may or may not fit). I'd stick with the 5K80 (a safe choice IMHO), or perhaps a 7K60 (that might turn out being a bit noisy, though).

Stephan, still dreaming of a 15K.3 to replace the not-too-shabby 36ES with (and a 5K80 instead of the 40GNX in the notebook would also be nice, just like a P2B-D rev. 1.06 to replace the P2L97-DS here), but BROKE...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now